Universal HCV Screening of Baby Boomers is Feasible, but It is Difficult.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to assess the impact of mass mailing and the inclusion of Best Practice Advisory (BPA) "Pop-Up" tool in the electronic medical record (EMR) on HCV screening rates. METHODS: Between June 2015 and March 2020, two interventions were developed for primary care physicians (PCP). An educational letter along with a blood requisition form, signed on behalf of the PCPs, was sent to patients. We also developed a BPA "Pop-Up" screening tool to alert PCPs to order HCV screening tests on patients with no previous screening. Data were collected and analyzed prospectively. RESULTS: When we started the screening program in June 2015, 33,736 baby boomers were eligible for screening, and the hospital system added an additional 26,027 baby boomers between June 2015 and March 2020. Of the 89 primary care providers employed by the hospital, 75 agreed to participate at different time periods. We screened 23,291 (43.5%) of 53,526 eligible patients during study period. Of these, 399 (1.7%) had HCV antibody, but HCV RNA was positive in only 195 (1%). HCV antibody positivity rates were higher in men, blacks, and in 1951-1960 birth cohorts. Spontaneous clearance rates appeared to be lower in men (OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.39-0.90, P = 0.015) and in blacks (OR 0.31, 95% CI 0.20-0.50, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Although a formal screening program increased screening rates for HCV among baby boomers, about 50% of baby boomers remained unscreened. In this community screening program, we found that men and blacks are less likely to have spontaneous HCV clearance.

How Good Are Controlled Attenuation Parameter Scores from Fibroscan to Assess Steatosis, NASH, and Fibrosis?

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The objective of our study was to determine the concordance rates of steatosis staging by controlled attenuation parameter (CAP) scores from transient elastography (TE) in comparison with liver histology in patients with chronic liver disease and to determine the optimal CAP cutoffs to predict the severity of steatosis and identify those with nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH). METHODS: Patients (n = 217) who had both CAP scores and liver biopsy within a period of 90 days were retrospectively studied. Histology was graded in a blinded fashion by a single pathologist; steatosis was graded on a scale from 0 to 3. Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease activity scores (NAS) scores were calculated for all patients. Optimal CAP cut-points were selected by maximum Youden's index. RESULTS: Area under receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) for CAP (using cutoff value ≥ 278 dB/m) in differentiating steatosis 1-3 from 0 was 0.82 (95% CI 0.75-0.89), and 0.79 (95% CI 0.70-0.88) in differentiating steatosis 0-1 from 2 to 3 using CAP cutoff value ≥ 301 dB/m. With CAP cutoff value ≥ 301 dB/m, CAP identified NAS 3 or above with AUROC of 0.82 (95% CI 0.74-0.89). The AUROC for TE in differentiating fibrosis (cutoff 11.9 kPa) 3-4 from 0 to 2 was 0.85 (95% CI 0.77-0.92), and 0.84 (95% CI 0.74-0.93) in differentiating (cutoff 14.4 kPa) 4 from 0 to 3. CONCLUSIONS: Transient elastography is a good modality to accurately diagnose steatosis and NASH and can also differentiate advanced liver fibrosis from early stages.

Hazard Ranking Methodology for Assessing Health Impacts of Unconventional Natural Gas Development and Production: The Maryland Case Study.

The recent growth of unconventional natural gas development and production (UNGDP) has outpaced research on the potential health impacts associated with the process. The Maryland Marcellus Shale Public Health Study was conducted to inform the Maryland Marcellus Shale Safe Drilling Initiative Advisory Commission, State legislators and the Governor about potential public health impacts associated with UNGDP so they could make an informed decision that considers the health and well-being of Marylanders. In this paper, we describe an impact assessment and hazard ranking methodology we used to assess the potential public health impacts for eight hazards associated with the UNGDP process. The hazard ranking included seven metrics: 1) presence of vulnerable populations (e.g. children under the age of 5, individuals over the age of 65, surface owners), 2) duration of exposure, 3) frequency of exposure, 4) likelihood of health effects, 5) magnitude/severity of health effects, 6) geographic extent, and 7) effectiveness of setbacks. Overall public health concern was determined by a color-coded ranking system (low, moderately high, and high) that was generated based on the overall sum of the scores for each hazard. We provide three illustrative examples of applying our methodology for air quality and health care infrastructure which were ranked as high concern and for water quality which was ranked moderately high concern. The hazard ranking was a valuable tool that allowed us to systematically evaluate each of the hazards and provide recommendations to minimize the hazards.